Comments by "Frederick Miles" (@frederickmiles8815) on "Not What You Think" channel.

  1. Two factors: 1) how many Russian ICBM's actually work? (hint, hint not many) 2) ICBM's rely on satellite guidance systems...just saying ;-) You are spot on with booster phase and AEGIS capabilities - also US has a lot of other capabilities that aren't advertised - especially if the realm of tracking.
    7
  2.  @alans9707  Totally agree - I have seen this first hand, in corrupt regimes its hard to provide accurate numbers upwards that is why the CCP and Putin's regime are so bad at conventional war. That is also why during the last 20 years their nuclear arsenal has greatly diminished and is no longer reliable.
    2
  3.  @sadekgheidan  Yes and their military is a next level juggernaut that will conquer the world ;-) The newer ones will work and we know that - hence my comments in regards to other capabilities. The legacy ones that pump up their numbers - no so much, and even they know that. The hypersonic stuff has been around for decades and like all of their capabilities are limited and not scalable, the emperor has no clothes. I can guarantee you all of our public numbers are legit - and only one side is thumping their chest; what does that make you think about what the other sides capabilities are? What if i told you the real threat DC feels is the beltway grifters losing Russia as a boogey man, or more comical - they fear the follow on civil war post Putin. And newsflash we arent animals like you people, we wouldnt nuke Moscow for the hell of it, only retalitary strikes. We only want to crush your shitty conventional army in the field and hand over Putin to Ukraine so that they can 'Gaddafi' him. Hell our ICBM's arent even the main show.
    1